‘Persistent Contrails’ forming cirrus clouds = weather modification.

October 8th, 2009 | by admin |


Petition calling for an investigation:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/7/investigate-persistent-contrails-aka-chemtrails

The topic of ‘chemtrails’ does not require ‘belief’, or subscription to fringe conspiracy theories. All that is needed to grapple with the truth is knowledge. Information is the key to understanding this phenomena.

‘Do your homework’ as the mason Maxwell says, and you move closer to true understanding. Balance your beliefs with truth. And don’t buy your own BS. :-)

While I have you…

Persistent contrails are a very rear event. From my limited primary research I understand that persistent contrails occur when the environment is about to produce mostly ‘dense cirrus’ clouds.

Today was not a day that produces persistent contrails. Most of my videos do not show ‘persistent contrails’ according to NASA’s definition. They show CHEMTRAILS…

Water Vapor + X

Duration : 0:2:53


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  1. 12 Responses to “‘Persistent Contrails’ forming cirrus clouds = weather modification.”

  2. By 2012forlove on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    Brisbane people .. …
    Brisbane people .. wake up .. see the sky !!!

    They are not genuine clouds at all .. they hang around the sun, like very white thick spongy carpet filler .. I would post the videos later on .. definitely major sprays .. i got up very early in the morning and I heard a few planes flying around … From my videos, I think you could tell the difference between the real clouds and those chemical filled sponge. The clouds dispersed like as they move, but the chemtrails become disjointed marks

  3. By MrSuntour on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    anutarasamyat,

    …
    anutarasamyat,

    This is incorrect. Persistent contrails are NOT new. They were first observed in the 1920’s and were prominent during WW2. The US bombers had to fly very high in the sky to avoid being spotted. Persistent contrails were a bane for the bombers, giving away their presence as well as pointing out their flight path.

    Google – “persistent contrails ww2″ for pictures of grids, X’s and circular contrails from 1945.

  4. By 3rdEyeDear on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    5 ***** example of …
    5 ***** example of how the some of the sprayed aerosols/chemicals react in the atmosphere. After all these years I’ll never get used to this oddity, of how they not only persist but billow out like that. Many times I’ve seen just ONE thin trail spread and turn a clear blue sky completely overcast from horizon to horizon! Peace.

  5. By deelean on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    Bastards should be …
    Bastards should be shot!

  6. By philwarinsky on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    That is my thinking …
    That is my thinking. ‘Persistent contrails’ sits kinda in the middle. The worshiped Media uses the term so we are afforded a degree of assumed correctness, this together with a good argument and we can layout a ’sane’ argument for at least questioning what we are seeing.

  7. By glazinq on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    This is kind of a …
    This is kind of a tricky issue. I think I understand your reluctance to call them “chemtrails”. Because “they” have been quite successful at treating the word with derision and ridicule in the same way as the mention of “conspiracy” makes some people’s eyes roll, as if there’s never ever been a conspiracy and how stupid you are for even thinking about it. At least if you say “persistant contrails” they HAVE to aknowledge these new clouds. Say “chemtrails” and you’re dismissed instantly. I dunno

  8. By JustinCoy on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    This is Sydney …
    This is Sydney Australia and ONE trail. Of all the flights that pass over this major AU capital WHY only one trail? This fact alone should arouse the suspicions of the sceptic. SIGN THE PETITION!
    Well done Phil.

  9. By philwarinsky on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    We are on the same …
    We are on the same page – good stuff. That is my understanding…

  10. By anutarasamyat on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    NO NO NO it isn’t …
    NO NO NO it isn’t you, it was the government boys who needed a term that sort of explained why they hung around for hours. If we start using the term, in a way we spread the lie…a persistent contrail is a con on the term itself. There are still contrails, and then there are these poisonous spray trails.

  11. By philwarinsky on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    Agreed – am I …
    Agreed – am I confusing the term do you think?

    Thanks mate.

  12. By anutarasamyat on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    The term..’ …
    The term..’persistent contrail’ in and of itself only became part of the vernacular because they only came into existence a decade ago. Before that a contrail was a contrail…they didn’t ‘persist’ past about 30 seconds. Now, the new term ‘persistent’ was added to confuse and spread disinformation. Period.

  13. By lichtengel60 on Oct 8, 2009 | Reply

    Merry Meet Sky …
    Merry Meet Sky Watcher thanks for posting
    5 stars
    Join the Global SkyWatches
    watch?v=c9ssOMo0Qmg

Post a Comment